What's new
By:

Tracking Down the Mystery of Air/Gravity Locking/Unlocking

knewman said:
Frustration rant incoming..

The root cause is Lucid chose the wrong technology for the job - the FOB and PAAK both use the BLE (Bluetooth low energy) protocol to auth with the vehicle.
Click to expand...
I am not sure I call it the "wrong" technology. The implementation is very much a product of the timing of the Air's design phase and release.

It is used because it was what everyone was using, including Tesla (which is probably the most known/prevalent use of PAAK).

Phones have much greater support for BLE than UWB. I mean, we didn't even see the first implementation of UWB for phones until the following:

2019 - Apple (Gen 1 UWB)
2021 - Google Pixel (Android)
2021 - Samsung Galaxy (Android)

Event today there are phones that do not support UWB unless you buy a premium version. As an example, my aging Pixel 8 Pro does, but the regular Pixel 8 did not.

But go on and tell us all that they used the "wrong" technology.

EDIT: As an addendum, I can't really say that UWB based PAAK for my 2025 Kia EV6 GT-Line really worked any better or worse than PAAK does on my Lucid.
 
Last edited:
knewman said:
Frustration rant incoming..

The root cause is Lucid chose the wrong technology for the job - the FOB and PAAK both use the BLE (Bluetooth low energy) protocol to auth with the vehicle. This protocol works fine for items that don't require direct interaction (think Apple air tags or a passive fitness tracker), but the handshake process and signal strength-based position sensing (among other quirks of BLE) can introduce too much overhead/latency for something we actively interact with like a locked door. When I push the handle it needs to present immediately, not once the Bluetooth has settled.

I strongly suspect Lucid introduced the proximity unlock "feature" in an attempt to mask the latency of the BLE protocol. In many cases the vehicle will be able to establish the BLE link, authenticate, and pop the handles by the time the user reaches the car.

There's no fixing that, unless Lucid wants to retrofit everyone's cars with a dedicated RF transmitter to handle this communication.
Click to expand...
For Air this is true, for Gravity they changed to UWB, this is one of the reasons Gravity is having so many teething problems. It's new for them. I had the same on my EV9 and the Fob was good. PAAK was iffy, ironically BLE on my Tesla Model Y worked so much better. For example my car is below my living room in my San Francisco house and the Tesla never unlocked when I was above it. The EV9 and the Gravity constantly unlock.

At least the Gravity says it's disabling unlock since nobody has opened the door!
 
knewman said:
Frustration rant incoming..

The root cause is Lucid chose the wrong technology for the job - the FOB and PAAK both use the BLE (Bluetooth low energy) protocol to auth with the vehicle. This protocol works fine for items that don't require direct interaction (think Apple air tags or a passive fitness tracker), but the handshake process and signal strength-based position sensing (among other quirks of BLE) can introduce too much overhead/latency for something we actively interact with like a locked door. When I push the handle it needs to present immediately, not once the Bluetooth has settled.

I strongly suspect Lucid introduced the proximity unlock "feature" in an attempt to mask the latency of the BLE protocol. In many cases the vehicle will be able to establish the BLE link, authenticate, and pop the handles by the time the user reaches the car.

There's no fixing that, unless Lucid wants to retrofit everyone's cars with a dedicated RF transmitter to handle this communication.
Click to expand...
Do you know how Rivian implements its lock/unlock? Again, my Rivian R1S and my Lucid AGT are parked side-by-side inside the same garage. Both cars' "keys" are on my phone (Android-Samsung S22 Ultra). The Rivian works every single time (no exaggeration). The Lucid is a crap shoot.
 
BS8899 said:
Do you know how Rivian implements its lock/unlock? Again, my Rivian R1S and my Lucid AGT are parked side-by-side inside the same garage. Both cars' "keys" are on my phone (Android-Samsung S22 Ultra). The Rivian works every single time (no exaggeration). The Lucid is a crap shoot.
Click to expand...
Gen 1 uses BLE. Gen 2 uses UWB (with fallback for BLE for devices that don't support UWB).

When I had a 2022 R1T Adventure quad motor PAAK worked great, despite being BLE based.
 
Cheezynachos said:
Gen 1 uses BLE. Gen 2 uses UWB (with fallback for BLE for devices that don't support UWB).

When I had a 2022 R1T Adventure quad motor PAAK worked great, despite being BLE based.
Click to expand...
Mine is a Gen 1 2023 R1S. PAAK works great. Never had a single problem with it.

So, why does Lucid struggle so much with its lock/unlock?
 
tmichael said:
I find my car wakes (and doors unlock) when approaching from the back or front of the car. Approaching from the side often does not open the doors
Click to expand...
I suspect in the Air they are using cameras. For example, if I leave my phone (back when my handles worked...) on a shelf, and walk by the car, it would open the handles. The phone doesn't move, just me.
 
BS8899 said:
Mine is a Gen 1 2023 R1S. PAAK works great. Never had a single problem with it.

So, why does Lucid struggle so much with its lock/unlock?
Click to expand...
If I were carrying the FOB + PAAK + Valet Card, how does the car sort out the conflicting signals? I suppose the Valet Card is more localized (on the pillar), but what about contention between the FOB and PAAK? What if I also press on the foor handle? How does the Lucid computer sort all these inputs?
 
socktucker said:
I suspect in the Air they are using cameras. For example, if I leave my phone (back when my handles worked...) on a shelf, and walk by the car, it would open the handles. The phone doesn't move, just me.
Click to expand...
They are not using the cameras. You wearing a smartwatch?
 
BS8899 said:
If I were carrying the FOB + PAAK + Valet Card, how does the car sort out the conflicting signals? I suppose the Valet Card is more localized (on the pillar), but what about contention between the FOB and PAAK? What if I also press on the foor handle? How does the Lucid computer sort all these inputs?
Click to expand...
Once it recognizes either the fob or phone it will unlock. It does not care which it is, just that a key is “present.”

proximity locking is a different issue, as it will require that neither key is present
 
borski said:
Once it recognizes either the fob or phone it will unlock. It does not care which it is, just that a key is “present.”

proximity locking is a different issue, as it will require that neither key is present
Click to expand...
I understand what you are saying. My question is more along the following lines:
> do the multiple unlocking methods go through the car's computer or are these (to borrow a physiological term) autonomic functions that actuate on their own vis-a-vis, the unlocking functions will perform even if the car's computer is not running?
> in either case (autonomic or somatic actuation), if conflicting inputs are received (e.g., FOB says "unlock", phone says "lock"), how is that arbitrated? This of course, assumes the conflicting inputs were close-in-time or simultaneous.

To up-level a bit, my question is, can the presence of multiple locking/unlocking methods and devices (PAAK, FOB, etc.) conflict with each other?
 
BS8899 said:
I understand what you are saying. My question is more along the following lines:
> do the multiple unlocking methods go through the car's computer or are these (to borrow a physiological term) autonomic functions that actuate on their own vis-a-vis, the unlocking functions will perform even if the car's computer is not running?
> in either case (autonomic or somatic actuation), if conflicting inputs are received (e.g., FOB says "unlock", phone says "lock"), how is that arbitrated? This of course, assumes the conflicting inputs were close-in-time or simultaneous.

To up-level a bit, my question is, can the presence of multiple locking/unlocking methods and devices (PAAK, FOB, etc.) conflict with each other?
Click to expand...
I don't think it works in a way that it would conflict (from a purely lock/unlock standpoint. Profile loading is a whole different ballgame).

#Proximity Lock/Unlock
If the car is locked, as soon as it senses an authenticated device has come into range, it unlocks. then as soon as it no longer sends his any authenticated devices in range, it will lock.

# No-Proximity Lock/Unlock
If the proximity lock unlock isn't set, the car does nothing in either case. If it's locked, and then you press the handle while any authenticated device is in range, it will unlock. If the car is not locked, and you push in the handle, then it will lock. (I don't know if it cares if there's an authenticated device in range or not for manual locking)

The only way I could see a potential conflict, is if you come into range with an authenticated device, the car decides to unlock, while at the same time you press the button on the fob that tells it to send the explicit lock signal. In which case I would assume the car would process in roughly the order the signals were received.
 
I always carry the FOB and my iPhone with the Lucid app running. So does my wife, having the FOB in her purse and the iPhone in her pocket.

The unlock is not always an issue. Mostly it will unlock as either of us or both approach. There are times that you can stand there for a few seconds before it presents the handles. If it takes a little longer than I think it should, pressing the handle has always worked.

Sometimes I use the voice actuation when I walk up to the car. If the handles do not present, stating "Wake up little Luci, wake up". does the trick.

Have not had the car refuse to lock when walking away.
 
doubletwist said:
If the car is not locked, and you push in the handle, then it will lock. (I don't know if it cares if there's an authenticated device in range or not for manual locking)
Click to expand...
Small corrections.

It does not care that a device is nearby when you are locking the car.

If the car is unlocked and the handles have retracted, pressing the handle will cause the handles to present (and the car to wake up). It only will lock if you press the handles while they are present.

I do not lock at home or when running errands. I find the car opens quicker if I need to open it and its unlocked. Plus while at home I can get something from the car even if I don't have a fob or phone.
 
Ditch the phone key and just use the FOB. Also worth asking service to check your door handles because defective microswitches are apparently a known issue and that fixes the problem for a lot of people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top